Agenda and minutes

To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting held on 17^th September 2019.

(Note: If any Member wishes to propose an amendment to the minutes they should submit this in writing to committeeservices@horsham.gov.uk at least 24 hours before the meeting.  Where applicable, the audio recording of the meeting will be checked to ensure the accuracy of the proposed amendment.)

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 17 September were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee

DC/19/0295 – Councillor Nigel Jupp declared a personal interest in this item.

DC/19/1226 – The Chairman of the Committee advised that the owner of the application site was closely involved in the selection of Conservative party District and County candidates in one part of the constituency. 

The following Councillors declared a prejudicial interest because of this close association:  John Blackall, Phillip Circus, Paul Clarke, Ray Dawe, Brian Donnelly, Roger Noel, Jack Saheid, Jim Sanson and Diana van der Klugt.

The following Councillors declared a personal interest because they were acquainted with the owner of the application site: Jonathan Chowen, Nigel Jupp, Lynn Lambert, Tim Lloyd, Josh Potts and Claire Vickers.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee or the Chief Executive

There were no announcements.

The list of appeals lodged, appeals in progress and appeal decisions, as circulated, was noted.

Ward: Billingshurst

Applicant: Arunway Ltd and Forelle Estates

The Head of Development reported that this hybrid application sought permission for the erection of a petrol station with convenience store and sandwich bar, car wash and parking, and a motorcycle showroom and workshop. It also sought outline planning permission for a flexible employment space with car parking and new access to the site from the A272 and a pedestrian link to the footbridge over the A29.

The site was located west of Billingshurst, outside the built-up area, and was bounded by the A29 to the east, the A272 to the north, and Newbridge Road to the south.  Platts Roundabout was to the northeast of the site.  A WSCC Household Waste Recycling facility and the Jubilee Fields Sports Pitches were opposite the site.  The site comprised part of a field currently in agricultural use.

Billingshurst Parish Council supported the application.  Chichester District Council raised no objection to the proposals.  In response to the initial consultation, there had been 20 representations objecting to the application, 34 in support and two commenting on the proposal.  In response to further consultation on revised plans, eight objections and one letter of support had been received. The Local Members had raised concerns regarding the height of the commercial units, and circulation space and parking provision.  Two members of the public spoke in objection to the application and one member of the public spoke in support of it.  The Applicant’s agent also spoke in support of the proposal.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of development; assessment of need; retail impact; landscape impact; highways impact; and layout, appearance and amenity.

Members noted the sustainable location, in close proximity to the village, and the employment benefits of the scheme.  Having weighed these against concerns regarding road safety, noise and impact on visual amenity, Members concluded that the proposal was acceptable. 

In response to comments from the Committee, it was agreed that Conditions 16 and 43, as printed in the report, be amended to include reference to a minimum number of EV charging points. It was also agreed that the footpath link along the eastern boundary should include provision for cyclists and that Condition 45 be amended accordingly. 

RESOLVED

(i)      That a legal agreement be entered into to secure a Highways Works Scheme, and a covenant to require the Phase 2 Employment Units to be offered to existing businesses within the District for a 12 month period.

(ii)      That subject to (i) above, planning application DC/19/0295 be determined by the Head of Development with a view to approval, subject to appropriate conditions.

(iii)     In the event that the legal agreement is not completed within three months of the decision of the committee, the Director of Place be authorised to refuse permission on the grounds of failure to secure the Obligations necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms.

Ward: Cowfold, Shermanbury and West Grinstead

Applicant: Mrs Dawn Richardson

The Head of Development reported that this retrospective application sought permission for the change of use of an existing building to a club for teaching various martial arts.

The application site comprised a single unit within a small rural industrial / agricultural estate approximately 330 metres west of the built up area of Cowfold.  Access was from a track to the north side of Station Road (A272).

An addendum had been circulated to Members summarising an objection from the Parish Council received after publication of the report. Their concerns included access and egress onto the A272, light pollution and onsite parking control.  The addendum also addressed the Parish Council’s concerns relating to the refused planning application CF/40/92 on the same site.

There had been 19 representations objecting to the application, and 111 letters of support had been received.  Three members of the public spoke in objection to the application.  The applicant and two members of the public spoke in support of the proposal. 

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were the principle of development, design and appearance, amenity impacts and highways impacts.

Members noted that the change of use would not result in a material change in the level of activity on the site.  In response to concerns regarding unacceptable levels of activity, it was agreed that Condition 2 be amended to limit the scale and number of any events held at the site.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/19/1283 be approved subject to the conditions as reported, with an amendment to Condition 2 regarding a Noise Management Plan, to include measures to manage the number and impact of events.

Ward: West Chiltington, Thakenham and Ashington

Applicant: Mr A Harrison

The Chairman of the Committee, along with those Councillors who had declared a prejudicial interest, left the room and the Vice Chairman of the Committee chaired the meeting during the determination of this item. 

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the erection of a two-storey building to provide eight apartments as well as the erection of an extension to the existing building to create an additional dwelling. It also sought a new access from Common Hill and 16 parking spaces.

The application site was located on the western side of Common Hill.  It sloped from north to south with a difference of around three metres across the site.  A large building known as Rambledown House was close to the northern boundary with a large shared garden to the south.

Since publication of the report the Council’s Landscape Architect had updated her comments, concluding that the revised plans as presented at the meeting would not adversely affect the character of the area in terms of landscape impact, and that it was of a scale that would not look out of place.  She also considered the proposed amenity space to be suitable. 

The presenting officer clarified that there was no planning requirement for proposed market housing within the built up area boundary to be allocated for local need, and therefore the statement within the report that the proposal did not include a mechanism for local housing did not mean that the applicant was at fault. 

The Parish Council supported the application.  There had been 20 representations objecting to the application and 37 in support, and two commenting on the proposal. 

Since publication of the report, a further two letters of objection repeating previous objections had been received.  One further letter had also been received expressing concern that the drainage strategy needed to ensure water does not drain onto other properties. 

Two members of the public spoke in objection to the application.  The owner of Rambledown House, the applicant and the applicant’s agent all spoke in support of the proposal.  A representative of the Parish Council also spoke in support of it. 

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were: the principle of development; housing need; design, layout and appearance; amenity impact; highways; and landscape and trees.

Members concluded that, whilst the principle of development on the site was acceptable and the proposal provided a housing benefit, the quantum of development on the site would create a cramped layout and lead to unacceptable noise and disturbance, in particular for neighbouring residents in the vicinity of the parking area.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/19/1226 be refused for the following reasons:

01   The combination of the scale of the apartment building, extension to the existing building, vehicular driveway and parking infrastructure to serve the proposed 9 additional apartments would create a cramped layout and form of development which would significantly reduce the spacing around the existing and proposed buildings  ...  view the full minutes text for item PCS/43

Ward: Storrington and Washington

Applicant: Mrs P Godsmark

Item withdrawn from the agenda.

Ward: Pulborough, Coldwaltham and Amberley

Applicant: Sir John Ritblat

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for the demolition of an agricultural building and the erection of a detached dwelling with associated access and landscaping.

The application site was located to the west of Stane Street (A29) in the rural countryside with sporadic development within the surrounding area.  The agricultural building on site benefitted from Prior Approval for conversion to a residential dwelling, granted under permission DC/17/0963.  The principle of the creation of a dwelling on this site had therefore been established.

The Parish Council objected to the application.  There had been two representations objecting to the application and one in support.  Two members of the public spoke in support of the application.  A representative of the Parish Council spoke in objection to the proposal.

Members considered the officer’s planning assessment which indicated that the key issues for consideration in determining the proposal were the principle of development and the fallback position, character and appearance, impact on neighbouring amenity, highways impacts of the proposal and ecology considerations.

Members discussed the proposal in the context of the existing Prior Approval for conversion of the barn and noted that permitted development rights would be removed under Condition 15 and that other conditions applied would be able to better control the impact of the development.  Members concluded that the design and setting of the proposal were acceptable.

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/19/0591 be approved subject to the conditions as reported.

Ward: Pulborough, Coldwaltham and Amberley

Applicant:  Mr Graham

The Head of Development reported that this application sought permission for a change of use of existing building from ancillary accommodation to residential dwelling.  It had been considered by the Committee in July when Members resolved to defer the application to allow further consideration of the safety of the junction of Batts Lane with Mare Hill Road (Minute No. PSC/19 (16.07.19) refers).

Members were referred to the previous report, which contained details of the application site, relevant policies, planning history, the outcome of consultations and a planning assessment of the proposal.

A further ten objections, from eight households, had been received since the application had been deferred by the Committee.  One member of the public and a representative of the Parish Council both spoke in objection to the application.  The applicant’s agent spoke in support of the proposal.

Members discussed the Highway Authority’s comments arising from the site visit and considered the limited extent to which the change from ancillary use to a separate dwelling might have on the number of traffic movements. 

RESOLVED

That planning application DC/19/0209 be granted subject to the conditions as reported.